Cardinality and acceptable abstraction
From MaRDI portal
Publication:1704082
Recommendations
Cites work
- Abstraction reconceived
- Bad company tamed
- Conservativeness, Stability, and Abstraction
- scientific article; zbMATH DE number 5964375 (Why is no real title available?)
- scientific article; zbMATH DE number 50939 (Why is no real title available?)
- scientific article; zbMATH DE number 1868658 (Why is no real title available?)
- Neo-Fregeanism: an embarrassment of riches
- Some criteria for acceptable abstraction
- THE POTENTIAL HIERARCHY OF SETS
Cited in
(15)- Hume's big brother: Counting concepts and the bad company objection
- Abstraction principles and the classification of second-order equivalence relations
- Notions of invariance for abstraction principles
- Which Abstraction Principles are Acceptable? Some Limitative Results
- Abstraction and four kinds of invariance (or: what's so logical about counting)
- Categories for the neologicist
- scientific article; zbMATH DE number 1868658 (Why is no real title available?)
- FOR BETTER AND FOR WORSE. ABSTRACTIONISM, GOOD COMPANY, AND PLURALISM
- Grounding and auto-abstraction
- Identity and the cognitive value of logical equations in Frege's foundational project
- TWO-SORTED FREGE ARITHMETIC IS NOT CONSERVATIVE
- Some criteria for acceptable abstraction
- Is Hume’s Principle analytic?
- A defense of logicism
- Arbitrary logicism
This page was built for publication: Cardinality and acceptable abstraction
Report a bug (only for logged in users!)Click here to report a bug for this page (MaRDI item Q1704082)